Influence of Natural Organic Matter Source on Copper Speciation As Demonstrated by Cu Binding to Fish Gills, by Ion Selective Electrode, and by DGT Gel Sampler
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss, 2 g) were exposed to 0-5 microM total copper in ion-poor water for 3 h in the presence or absence of 10 mg C/L of qualitatively different natural organic matter (NOM) derived from water spanning a large gradient in hydrologic residence time. Accumulation of Cu by trout gills was compared to Cu speciation determined by ion selective electrode (ISE) and by diffusive gradients in thin films (DGT) gel sampler technology. The presence of NOM decreased Cu uptake by trout gills as well as Cu concentrations determined by ISE and DGT. Furthermore, the source of NOM influenced Cu binding by trout gills with high-color, allochthonous NOM decreasing Cu accumulation by the gills more than low-color autochthonous NOM. The pattern of Cu binding to the NOM measured by Cu ISE and by Cu accumulation by DGT samplers was similar to the fish gill results. A simple Cu-gill binding model required an NOM Cu-binding factor (F) that depended on NOM quality to account for observed Cu accumulation by trout gills; values of Fvaried by a factor of 2. Thus, NOM metal-binding quality, as well as NOM quantity, are both important when assessing the bioavailability of metals such as Cu to aquatic organisms.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".